Appeal from order allowing use of closed material procedures under section 6 of the 2013 Act.
Richards LJ said: ‘The 2013 Act is one of those in which Parliament has stipulated that a closed material procedure may be permitted by the court. It represents Parliament’s assessment of how, in relevant civil proceedings, the balance is to be struck between the competing interests of open justice and natural justice on the one hand and the protection of national security on the other, coupled with express provision in section 14(2)(c) to secure compliance with article 6. It is certainly an exceptional procedure, and in the nature of things one would expect it to be used only rarely, but the conditions for its use are defined in detail in the statute. In the circumstances there is, in my judgment, no reason to give the statutory provisions a narrow or restrictive construction, save for any reading down that may be required, in accordance with the terms of the statute itself, for compliance with article 6. Subject to that point, the provisions should be given their natural meaning and applied accordingly.’
Richards, Sullivan, McFarlane LJJ
[2015] EWCA Civ 687, [2016] 3 All ER 837
Bailii
Justice and Security Act 2013 6
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Sarkandi and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs Admn 11-Jul-2014
The claimants had wrongly been listed as sanctions breakers, and now challenged the respondent’s refusal to remove them from the related list. . .
Cited by:
Cited – Belhaj and Another v Director of Public Prosecutions and Another SC 4-Jul-2018
Challenge to decision not to prosecute senior Intelligence Service officials for alleged offences in connection with his unlawful rendition and mistreatment in Libya. The issue here was whether on the hearing of the application for judicial review, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 30 July 2021; Ref: scu.550204
